New drug squad corruption allegations

New corruption allegations involving detectives from Victoria's former drug squad have convinced the state's highest court to re-open an appeal by two men jailed over a $2.7 million cocaine importation.

In what is believed its first such move in 60 years, the Court of Appeal yesterday allowed lawyers for the men to submit new appeal grounds based on claims by imprisoned former detective Stephen Paton.

Six months after reserving judgement on the appeals of Werner Paul Roberts and Carl Heinze Urbanec, the court acted because of Paton's conviction for drug trafficking and because of his allegations against two former superiors.

Roberts and Urbanec were jailed - along with Melbourne solicitor Andrew Fraser and Roberts's wife Andrea Mohr - in 2001 for their roles in the importation of 5.5 kilograms of cocaine.

Roberts's defence at his trial was that Rosenes and Paton were so desperate to get Fraser they blackmailed Roberts to incriminate Fraser by having him participate in a sham importation.

It was revealed yesterday that, in a sworn statement to investigators from the Victoria Police anti-corruption taskforce Ceja, Paton claimed he refused an approach by his boss, Detective Senior Sergeant Wayne Strawhorn, to plant cocaine in Fraser's home.

Roberts's barrister, Bill Stuart, said that Paton had also claimed that another detective senior sergeant, Malcolm Rosenes, suggested to Paton he resign to protect himself and Strawhorn.

A Supreme Court judge will decide tomorrow whether to grant Strawhorn bail after he was arrested in March by Ceja officers and charged with offences that include trafficking and threatening to kill Paton.

Rosenes has yet to be dealt with on charges that include trafficking ecstasy. Paton was jailed in June for a maximum of six years. Fraser pleaded guilty and was jailed for a maximum of seven years, Roberts for 13, Urbanec for nine and Mohr for eight.

One of the grounds in Roberts's and Urbanec's original appeal in February against their convictions and sentences was that the trial judge erred by refusing to allow the jury to hear that Rosenes and Paton had been charged.

In evidence to the jury, Rosenes told Roberts's barrister, George Traczyk, that it was "repugnant" for him to question his integrity.

Paton described the allegations against him as a "fairly desperate ploy by someone who's saying anything to stay out of jail".

Arguing against the appeal grounds in February, the Crown submitted in part that charges were not evidence of bad character.

Mr Stuart argued yesterday that the defence run at the trial, which was described as "fanciful" by the Crown, now has "root in fact".

Paul Holdenson, QC, for the Crown, said that nothing Paton had sworn affected the trial or issues the jury considered.